Stuff

Two new voting intention polls this week showing very similar figures. YouGov‘s latest poll was actually conducted last week, but was only released today and has topline figures of CON 41%, LAB 42%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 4% (full tabs are here.

ICM also asked about people’s attitudes towards Britain paying a financial settlement as part of our Brexit negotiations (a so-called “exit fee”). ICM asked similar questions back in April and found very little support – only 10% thought paying a £20bn settlement would be acceptable, 15% a £10bn fee and 33% a £3bn exit fee. This time the figures suggested in the question were changed to what are probably more realistic figures and with interesting results – now 9% think a settlement of £40bn would be acceptable, 11% a £30bn settlement, 18% a £20bn settlement, 41% a £10bn settlement.

On the face of it this one might think this is a startling change, a few months ago only 15% thought it would be acceptable to pay a £10bn settlement as part of Brexit, now 41% think it’s acceptable. I think it’s probably actually a good example of the importance of context in a question. Most people are really not that good at putting figures of billions of pounds in context – any sum that involves the words billion is a huge amount of money to begin with, so what would be a relatively small settlement? A moderate settlement? A huge settlement? The only thing respondents have to scale it by is the question itself. In April £3bn was implicitly presented as the small option and £10bn was presented as the medium option. In this poll £10bn is implicitly presented as the small option and £20bn or £30bn are presented as the medium options – hence why a £10bn settlement suddenly seems to be so much more paletable.

That’s not to say the question doesn’t tell us anything at all – there’s still an interesting increase. In April only 33% thought a “small” financial settlement would be acceptable as part of the Brexit deal; now that figure has risen to 41% (despite the actual figure quoted tripling!). It looks as if the public may be moving towards accepting that a financial settlement may be an inevitable part of Brexit.

Bit rusty and without completely reviewing the methodology differences am I correct in saying that the main difference between Survation and YouGov can be chiefly explained by how they handle DNV (big in Survation poll) and the rest is well within MOE? DK for CON handled same by both pollsters according to my notes/model but it is high for CON.

Also worth remembering LAB need a 2%ish lead just to get same seats as CON (huge list of assumptions on UNS, tactical voting, Scotland, etc). So, all in very close to neck-neck in seats if an election was coming any time soon and almost certainly a hung parliament.

Any views on why LD so low? Expected them to have seen some boost from return of tactical voters and new leader? UKIP is one to watch – sure to grow (at CON expense) if CON slide too far on Brexit but offers a small short-term stockpile of CON tactical votes now LAB have gone Soft?
It was unrealistic to expect LAB to be CON’s doormat for Brexit but LAB’s new stance has indirectly increased CON’s need to stand firm in negotiations and hence increase risk of no-deal.

Not that I’m expecting another GE anytime soon, just good to freshen up my memory after the Summer and less disturbing than over-thinking what might happening in Korea and how that is/will effect the financial markets (YouGov have a live poll on that FWIW – generally agree on the inferred % likelihoods although DK should probably be higher!!).

YouGov tables are about as static as you can get. The only significant change is an increase for ‘Security and Defence’ in ‘most important issues’ and the addition of a question for the topic to the ‘which party would handle the problem best’ section. But even that increase is only six points.

But we do have the return of page 2 (thank you Anthony) and we can see that the Labour lead on June mainly comes from a shift from other Parties rather than the June Conservatives having a higher ‘drop-out’ rate to DK etc. As it happens the Survation tables do show that as well – hence maybe the bigger lead.

TREVOR WARNE:
My view on the lack of a Lib Dem bounce is that, for all Farron’s failings, he at least staked out clear ground and a solidly different policy on what they consider the most important issue of the day. We’ve heard little from Cable about where he’ll be taking the party (yes, it’s early days) so who can say where they stand on anything? Doesn’t make for a strong proposition to vote for.

Add to that the fact that Cable is hardly a new face in the party, and it doesn’t surprise me that they aren’t getting a bit boost from fresh blood.

This shows the country evenly split between leave and remain with ardent leavers and ardent remainers being the largest group on either side. I’m quite surprised that there are as many ardent Remainers as there are ardent leavers. But maybe ‘relived isn’t as strong an emotion as ‘angry’

Tbf its been the Summer hols but Corbyn has still been out and about, heard little to nothing from Cable. He feels like the wrong fit for me, but they’ve not got a big pool to chose from so might be the best choice but best does not mean good.

His impact nationally also does not mean the Lib Dems cannot have a local impact which really should be their strategy to rebuild.

@ HIRETON – ?? This is going over very old ground but I’ll bite as keeps me away from reading up on THAAD’s effectiveness while I await UN info.

For Germany the Euro and EU straight jackets explain a lot of their advantage in areas such as complete cars (the DEM would be 10-20% stronger outside a single currency and the EU market (which for now still includes UK) would be more open to competition) – sorry, lost my great bookmark link to explain that in depth. Germany’s intra-EU trade breaks EU rules but have the EC ever either mentioned that let alone fine them?? No, the focus is on enforcing austerity on weaker economies to meet SGP deficit rules. Has the UK adopted that austerity approach with Scotland?!? Who is really funding Sturgeon’s promise to increase Scottish nurses pay?
Arguably Japan and China are both currency manipulators as well. China have a cost advantage of course and that is fair enough in base level manufacturing – we should focus on the value add, finished goods, technological side not more Sports Directs. Import components from Asia, make more of the cars/finished good in UK (freely floating exchange rate, reshoring, J-Curve, etc, etc – no time to rewrite the thesis)

We could/would import more food from Africa (I prefer near free trade to the EU’s approach of bullying and bribing – some trade unionist agree with that!). As for exports well the developing World is a better opportunity than likes of US, Japan but won’t grab the headlines. Obviously sell services, tech, pharma, etc back to Africa and every other developing nation in the World (growth much higher than EU27 and we have a clear competitive advantage). Scotland should be happy (although they’d never admit it) to see lower tariffs on Whisky to major new and developing markets in Asia, Latam :) etc, etc.

I can’t believe you’ve never seen anything other than Minford’s view on how to make Brexit a success. I cleared out most of my bookmarks on Brexit over the Summer as, like Corbyn, I know the matter is settled. Posting more than 1link also puts me in the moderation sin bin, however, if you read May’s Lancaster House speech (scroll to end of section 9) you’ll see the goal is to “..remove as many barriers of trade as possible.. with the EU, old friends and new allies.”https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-governments-negotiating-objectives-for-exiting-the-eu-pm-speech
NB “as possible” is not instant move to zero. Had another good link on the step lowering of WTO tariffs that I sadly deleted but am sure it’s quick to find on google. Once we take back our own seat in WTO we can push for a global lowering of tariffs (next US presidential election is Nov’20 and Trump might no even get GoP approval so a dead duck from shortly after Mar’19). The word “ally” has depth as well, something the likes of Japan and smaller nations around the World respect even if EU believe they single handly kept Europe out of war for the last 72years!?!

Minford is not chancellor, Farage has nothing to do with CON policy but I’d agree much of the Leave campaign at the time was lies (as was Remain) – no argument with BBZ or yourself on that.

@ BBZ – you want something that is not on offer. EU have always said we cannot have cake and eat it. It’s all 4 freedoms of the Single Market or a new deal. Corbyn accepted this before the GE – that is why it is a U-turn and not a clarification. The EU have said we can no longer stay in Single Market. The CU is 1st freedom – trade on goods. For sure the way to make Brexit a disaster and go to the grave being able to say “I told you so” is to lock in to the CU while handing over the money and not having a new deal on capital/services (2nd and 3rd freedom). The 4th freedom is labour and if it wasn’t for the slim CON majority and threat of resurgent UKIP I had always hoped that would be the “red line” that we’d smudge in order to get a fair new future deal. The important red lines (IMHO) are:
1/ to be able to negotiate our own new deals during transition (compromise on not enacting them until after a short transition)
2/ ensure all steps of transition are agreed before agreeing exact sums on the divorce bill (compromise on ongoing payments and a formula for the balance to be paid out during the phased exit)

Also worth remembering LAB need a 2%ish lead just to get same seats as CON (huge list of assumptions on UNS, tactical voting, Scotland, etc). So, all in very close to neck-neck in seats if an election was coming any time soon and almost certainly a hung parliament.

Fair point, but you could add to the mix that the DUP remain the only possible chums for any Con minority whilst all the other “minor” parties would almost certainly support Lab over Con, potentially making the 2%ish lead moot, and even the DUP may become nervous at defending a hard Irish border to their electorate, given their leave campaign promises that that there would not be one.

@ CAMBRIDGERACHAEL – the Remain/Leave question still being asked by pollsters is still phrased as a do-over so non-sensicle. The question would not be the same as the one from 2016, neither would the terms. To return would need unanimous consent of 27 nations, new terms and under the new EU framework (e.g. QMV changed shortly after we left).
Given the redundant question is still split evenly despite other polls showing drop in expectations from leaving I wonder how a genuine question asking about stop current negotiations and start new negotiations to rejoin would split?
The polling question about “honouring” the vote, etc (usually 70%ish in the Yes) are more informative but don’t really capture the choices that a new GE might offer.

P.S. How was the picket outside McDonalds? Did Corbyn or McDonnell show up?

and show that both the UK and France At this point would prefer that Britain leaves the European Union? by 47-43 and 38-32 respectively – though the French have the highest DKs. All the other countries (Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, even Norway) want the UK to stay.

YouGov also asked the Leavers:

You have said that you would prefer that Britain leave the European Union. If you had to choose, would you prefer that Britain left…Immediately [or] Only after Brexit negotiations are complete

Half of all British leavers (48-47) wanted to leave immediately – a wonderful example of how so many Leave voters are emotionally-driven rather than thinking things through. No other country’s Leave backers were so reckless, though the French came close 46-50 (Si tu dois partir indeed).

It would be truer to say that we don’t know whether the question is nonsensical, as we don’t know whether the matter can be revisited and if so under what terms, and more specifically whether notice given under Article 50 can be rescinded and if so under what terms.

The most ardent posters on either side are remarkably certain on this point at times but they seem the only ones who are. I have taken to task on this thread some who shout for remain and assume that all we have to do is change our minds. I don’t believe they know that to be true. But equally I don’t believe you know it to be false.

The reality is that you can get perfectly learned views that say anything from the process cannot be stopped, to the process can be stopped on the last day at the UK’s sole whim, and through all points in between. Without a ruling from the CJEU, which all parties at present seem keen to avoid, bare assertions in any direction here are so much hot air.

Of course, it might have been helpful for the Article to say so in terms one way or the other, but that wouldn’t have been in keeping with its whole shambolic back of a fag packet drafting.

Interesting Yougov Eurotrack poll, though a more representative set of nations would have been better (why four Nordic countries and no Mediterranean or Eastern ones? Presumably YG don’t have panels there).

Hopefully this will become a regular series so that we can track movements in opinion.

Personally, I’m surprised there is still a wish for the UK to remain in the EU (except for UK and France), but it’s good to see our old friends haven’t given up on us yet.

Given that 30% of the country would be angry if we didn’t leave I can’t see how we can reverse Brexit unless a much higher number would be ecstatic if we didn’t leave. Brext will continue to tear the country apart until we have a clear overwhelming majority for one option. 50% +1 is not enough

“It is likely, however, that the UK will rejoin the EU sometime, perhaps even in my lifetime, when the likely terms of that deal are indeed worse than the ones which HMG have rejected following the advisory referendum.
The golden lining then will be the naming and shaming of any surviving leave campaigners by the rejoin campaign for having been untruthful, to put it mildly.”

Your argument that we should import more African food is an odd one. The continent only produces c.80% of the food it consumes and the most effective policy to help local farmers would surely be to satisfy local markets first. The most effective way to do this is to improve farm-to-market infrastructure (it’s often cheaper to import American wheat than to bring millet from 50 miles away). The main reasons we (the EU) don’t import more is not unfair barriers/tariffs but (1) inadequate transport and storage infrastructure in Africa (2) high transport costs (3) lack of suitable crops at a competitive price.

Most African food exports are of commodity crops (coffee, cocoa, tea, palm oil); high value seasonal crops (green beans from Kenya, new potatoes from Egypt); and a few traditional products (dates). Where more sophisticated agricultural and transport infrastructure exists (notably S Africa), there are plenty of food exports to the EU, both as crops and processed products (especially wine, in the case of SA).

There is a good argument for working to increase value-added in African food exports by lowering tariffs on processed goods, but the few examples of successful Africa-produced branded goods (eg Milo chocolate drink produced by Nestlé in Kenya) sell successfully in EU markets (check out the Milo in Sainsbury’s).

If the aim is to promote an export-orientated African food processing industry, then the best way is surely to work within the EU system to find ways (including reduced tariffs) to do this. Most left-leaning people will be thoroughly supportive of this; I’m not sure right-leaners will be so sympathetic.

I should perhaps add to my post on African agriculture that Africa countries are of course free to trade with the world, unshackled by membership of supranational entities. They have access to all the fast-growing developing markets that offer so much more glowing prospects to the UK than the staid old EU markets. They already have the benefits that will accrue to the UK from Brexit. Odd that it’s lack of better access to the EU that’s holding them back.

So essentially it’s the fault of beastly foreigners ( with a few gratuitous swipes at Scotland thrown in). And no clear plan other than selling high end goods and services to some of the poorest countries in the world. Righto.

Somerjohn
“If the aim is to promote an export-orientated African food processing industry,..”

Surely our aim would be to buy food as cheaply as possible from around the world. The empire doesn’t exist any more. It’s up to the other countries themselves what industries they promote, and up to us to buy the best value.

Interesting Yougov Eurotrack poll, though a more representative set of nations would have been better (why four Nordic countries and no Mediterranean or Eastern ones? Presumably YG don’t have panels there).
Hopefully this will become a regular series so that we can track movements in opinion.

They don’t seem to have operations in Europe outside of Scandinavia, Germany and France:

Pete B: Surely our aim would be to buy food as cheaply as possible from around the world. The empire doesn’t exist any more. It’s up to the other countries themselves what industries they promote, and up to us to buy the best value.

Well, I think I would mostly agree with that. But I was responding to Trevor Warne’s pst, so you really need to address your post to him.

A good example, BTW, of how fellow-Brexiteers have radically different ideas of how a “free” UK should run its economy.

“It is a quote from a track on Primal Scream’s 1991 album, ‘Screamadelica’.”

Personally I enjoyed the quote. But it’s a lot older than that. Primal Scream sampled it from a 1966 film “The Wild Angels”. The lines were said by Peter Fonda. Maybe the denizens of UKPR are more likely to have seen a 1966 film than heard a 1991 track?

———————————————

I didn’t catch ‘Wild Angel’ but I did see ‘Easy Rider’ when it came out in 1969. Dunno if that makes me a ‘denizen ‘ or not, I’ll have to look it up. :-)

Valerie
“ The song is called ‘Loaded’ and it isn’t about TOH’s financial status :-)”

I had a smile at that, but comfortable would be more accurate.
Thinking of you choice of band (Primal Scream) and you comment

“Well having scrolled through acres of speculation about Brexit,”

I think your band choice sounds very appropriate for much of the discussion here.

Somerjohn
“Don’t tell TOH about the Empire. You’ll spoil his day.”

Very droll, where do you get them from?

You would find it very hard to spoil my day, since I spent it doing some biological recording, which I always enjoy, and later listening to Wagners “Götterdämmerung” from his Ring Cycle. An opera which seems strangely and sadly appropriate when thinking about the likely future collapse of the EU.

@ BBZ – agree no one would enter coalition with CON, for now my only concern is CON staying within a recoverable gap below LAB. Also, no problem with EEA (prefer EFTA and Swiss model rather than Norway) for as short as possible provided it’s part of phased withdrawal with everything else agreed (at least in principle) beforehand. That will probably be the compromise (it should not be our opening position and should have a definitive end date, certainly not decades). The key is ensuring we can strike our own deals asap. Also, no problem with any party having a new referendum promise on their manifesto. For sure we could rejoin whatever the EU morphs into at some future date. Voters can assess the merits of the rejoin referendum if/when that happens. I can see a scenario where I’d vote to rejoin and I think you can guess what that would be :)

@ PETERW – yes, the real question would be in the middle. I’m simply highlighting it would not be the same question. Attempting to phrase an honest question is impossible at the moment. As/when a final deal is on the table polling companies can ask a question that at least has some substance (e.g. take the deal, walk away, (try to) “remain”) but even then anything phrased around trying to remain will be in error if it fails to make clear the need to negotiate a deal to return (it seems the French voters wouldn’t want us back so just like the 1960s wanting in doesn’t mean getting in)

@ SOMERJOHN – I mentioned Africa largely as it was the focus of the Trade Unionist’s Against EU piece I posted y’day (worth a read if you haven’t – those Trade Unionists make UKIP look like EUphiles!!). Nestle (Swiss) sounds like a great example of the kind of help businesses based in developed nations should be providing – much better than dumping excess EU produce on their market stifling local businesses (China dump steel on the global market but they are a poor nation hitting rich nations – EU dumping food products in Africa is morally much worse). Expect to be shot down but providing a market for African nations to export GM crops (and hence develop them and encourage them to grow them) would help make their own continent more self-sustaining.

Sorry if I missed replying to anyone – far too much from me today – apologies. US seem to want to exhaust diplomatic options in Korea first so it’s PC off time for me for today. I think we’ll probably see how successful THAAD is in in a real environment pretty soon though!

Switzerland and Norway can and do, do that already because they’re not in the Customs Union.

The problem for the UK would be re Ireland, where some transition period in the Customs Union would be essential, I think, although provided we don’t waste valuable time repealing EU law with which we plan to comply, that could be fudged in the longer term if we behave responsibly in maintaining EU standards.

I really don’t understand why anyone in Europe would wish to be outwith the single market if they wish to sell to other European countries. The EEA countries all operate the EU standards, as will candidate countries who wish to join the EU. Dropping those standards strikes me as madness, irrespective of whatever tat they wish to export elsewhere.

“The EEA countries all operate the EU standards, as will candidate countries who wish to join the EU”

It would be interesting to see the detail of where “EU standards” differ from “WTO standards” – since the EU regulations (I think) incorporate all the WTO ones – the old “straight bananas” nonsense is just one among many examples of that.

Also, which of those differences have a significant effect on UK producers?

It’s odd that in most EU countries you never or hardly ever see straight bananas anywhere.

In the past few months I have bought bananas in well known supermarket chains in Portugal, Spain, France & Switzerland, but they’ve all been very curved at both ends but when I have visited the UK over the past few years the same supermarket chains have only stock straight one.

Perhaps it was a dastardly covert scheme by UKIP to remove all traces of rounded bananas as part of their leave campaign. Not that I’m paranoid, of course.

It’s one of the great things in a democracy that even the stupidest member of the Question Time audience ever” award winner gets a vote, since they are frequently matched by idiots on the other side of the argument.

If she had seen an old police box, she would have been scurrying home to avoid the Daleks.

Two Countries that between them have in 40 years gone from little more than 5% of global trade to nearly 25%.

In other words most of the decline of the west has been brought about by the massive growth of China and to a lesser extent India. In this context there are as many questions as answered and for me at least the flee the failing EU narrative is a bit flimsy.

So the questions. I don’t have answered but I’d be interested in the views of others.

1) It’s easy to see why the City was cool on Brexit. Being in the EU hasn’t stopped them becoming a Global Financial Centre so why take the risk, but what of the future.

If we lose business with the EU or to it will it speed our decline of our share of world trade or if we do better by shifting east how exposed would we be to the banking systems of China and India.

2) Not only are India and China huge fast expanding markets they need also to be seen as our most formidable competitors. In the global market Brexiteers are so keen to get stuck into we are up against the Indian Tiger and the the Chinese Dragon.

China has a reputation as the worlds biggest culprit in terms of both Intelectual Property theft and Counterfeited goods. What exactly is it that we can make they can’t or more importantly what do they want from us and what will they do when they get it.

Top of China’s list in a free trade deal with the U.K. would be Rolls Royce and one thing they need; the ability to make state of the art jet engines. I can’t see the US being happy about that!

Little more than 10 years ago Nokia and Ericsson we’re world leaders in phones, it’s estimated within 10 years China will be No 1.

IBM used to make Laptops in the US, the moved manufacture to China, China bought them out and now Lenovo make what some say are the best Laptops on the market.

Earlier we had speculation about turning to post Brexit trade with Africa, but China already invest more and have far stronger links across the continent than we have.

Having left the stifling EU Walled Garden and moving in Column with our partners are we about to find out it’s a jungle out there and that Shere khan isn’t to be trusted.